Doctrine of Fair Use and Law of Copyright

Question: Discuss the Case of Campbell v. Acuff-Rose Music. Answer: Comments of Justice David Souter and the legal principles involved Justice Souter began his analysis by referring Lord Ellenborough that there must be simultaneous balance to protect works already copyrighted but they must allow others to build other materials on them. He also held that the music groups parody referred to as fair use under section 107 of the Copyright Act, 1976 (Bunker et al.). Justice Souter applied the second legal principle of Section 107, which deals with the character of the work copyrighted. The Supreme Court remanded the case and made a reversion of the decision of the Court of Appeals. Acuff-Rose Music dismissed the law-suit and the rap music group agreed to acquire license for the parody (Leval and Pierre). Legality of Bill So Horny Jack Thompson, who was the Broward Countyprosecutor,prosecuted the 2 Live Crew music group on charges obscenity and referred a judge of Federal District to relate the referred album as obscene on June 1990. The 2 Live Crew music group performed songs from the album named "Me So Horny" and were prosecuted for the charge of obscenity. The clerks of the record stores were arrested who sold the copies of the album. The Supreme Court of United States reversed the decision made by District Judge on appeal. Recommendations The album Bill So Horny is definitely obscene because the video contains vulgar, dirty and salacious materials. Reference List Bunker, Matthew D., and Clay Calvert. "Jurisprudence of Transformation: Intellectual Incoherence and Doctrinal Murkiness Twenty Years after Campbell v. Acuff-Rose Music, The."Duke L. Tech. Rev.12 (2013): 92. Leval, Pierre N. "[90WashLRev0597] Campbell as Fair Use Blueprint?."